Readers' comments

Quite apart from the repeated erroneous references to "FBC" when "FBS" was intended, C.N. doesn't sound all that familiar with American college football.

Referring to "Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS), formerly Division 1" is not accurate. Division I (not 1) still exists, and includes the FBS schools and the 100+ FCS schools. The FBS was formerly known as Division I-A, while the FCS was formerly called Division I-AA.

I am not sure if the author actually watched the Oklahoma State Savannah State game. If the author had, he/she would have realized that OSU pulled the first string out before the end of the first quarter and were playing 4th and 5th string players for most of the second half. If OSU only wanted to rack up a lot of points, the first string would have played most of the game. Instead, this game afforded an opportunity for 3rd-5th string players to gain significant playing time. For Savannah State, the game gave their players a chance to play a ranked team on national television so there is a lot more about this than money.

All good points, though I would note that Florida State was originally scheduled to play West Virginia, an FBS team and a much more worthy opponent. WVU backed out, so FSU had to scramble to find an opponent...Savannah State was the only taker.

You also have to consider the benefits of breaking up a schedule with some fluff games to keep the practice squad sharp, motivated, and in game shape, all while resting up big performers. In conferences like the SEC where you can get the top few teams in the country packed into a single division (SEC West alone had LSU, Alabama, & Arkansas as 1, 2, & 3 for a while last year), a good athletic director needs some down weeks to space things out.

I am waiting for a union activist to organize the college players so that they can get a fair cut of the revenue. Even if they were unsuccessful I think it would be a good thing to talk about seriously.

What is very interesting to note is that with the new changes to the FBS bowl system, the future of these creampuff games is in doubt. With the new playoff system coming into effect in 2014, top tier teams who want to compete for a national title will be judged not only on their win-loss record but also their "strength of schedule." When that happens, what happens to those mid-tier and low-tier programs that no longer can rely on the massive inflows of cash from top tier programs? Will it lead to schools dissolving their football programs or radical shakeup of those programs?

Maybe the Economist could do a comparison between major university football programs and major university academic programs. This magazine always talks about how mid tier and low tier universities often not worth the cost to a student, could football be entering the similar paradigm soon?

There will likely be fewer poor matchups come 2014, but they won't disappear altogether. Watch them move these games from early in the season until later in the season. With no need (ability) to bowl stack at the outset, top teams will put the lower ranked teams in between big games so Alabama doesn't have to play Arkansas week 10 and then LSU week 11.